Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1887-02-17

plain statute laws and overthrev
decision on decision of our formei
supreme courts.
You dodge the issue and refer t.
the final terminus of the Manley
case to show my arguments ground
less. Don't you suppose the peo
pie have sense enough to see that
| referred to the bond in each case
and showed how they dismissed
the Tucker-Dawn case upon the
bond and on the following day
virtually decided they had no right
to enquire into the bond in the
Manley case. And to enlighten you
and show you just how much re-
spect the attorneys had for the
decisions of the court, let me say
that the attorney for the defense
in the Manley-Scales case openly
admitted, while the case was under
advisement by the court on the
motion, that he did not make
the motion because he thought il
was right or that the law warrant
ed the court in sustaining it, but
because the decision in the Tucker
Dawn case on the previous day
was a complete abrogation of the
laws as he understood them and OF
all former rulings of Cherokee SUI
preme courts and he wanted to see
if they proposed to stand by the
rulings in the Tucker-Dawn case,
or if they would improve this op-
portunity to return to former
pecidents. And right here let me
thank him for the patriotic motive.
Why don't you meet the issue
fairly? Why don't you say Joab
Scales has the right to practice
before the different branches of the
supreme court and set up some
reason why it is so? Or why don't
you assert that the court gave the
people something besides a stone
when they asked for bread and why
do you flaunt the bloody shirt OF
the Territory at me? I'll wager |
have more interest in the Cherokee
nation to-day than you. Do you
think it will have the same effect
among intelligent people that the
old garment hung out by the radi-
calls after the rebellion, had with
the colored men in the south2 II
you did it for this, well and good.
But if you did it to hide your
stupidity and make me appear in
significant in the eyes of the Cher
okee people, "Then get thee to the
cradle, for thou art child again. 4"
Do you reside in this nation, and
do you know anything Of the
present administration when you
so boldly assert, that at is the
duty of this tribunal to see that the
law is carried out?" Don't you
know that the supreme executive
power Of this nation has wrestled
this right from the judiciary, and
with the hand of an avenging angel
has welded the blade, leaving a
sepulcher that the judiciary has not
had the courage to look into? And
now Mr.. a." let us examine your
masterstroke. The one by which
you expected to bury me so deep
that I'd fail to hear the last, sad
note of the angels call. You say,
And rising way up on his perch
Of self-conceit he would have
everybody view him as the only
fit material out of which to build
court of justice, the absurdity of
which so prominently appears
when our readers take note that
Subscriber would give Joab
Scales, supreme court clerk, only
5000, while an act of the national
council, approved December LIST,
1882, allows that official s400 per
o, thou deluded youth; 60 back
10 thy mother and ask her to
shelter you from the cruel blasts;
ell her you need her teaching; that
life is a bitter mockery without
some brains, and that you find
hat your verdant mind needs her
ostering care, and that although
you have courage enough to
write an article for a country news
paper to "defend a court" ," that you
haven't got sense enough to know
What the supreme court clerks
ialary is. No, "a" the national
council did not pass any such act
rs you say it did, nor was any such
lct approved upon the 1st of De-
,ember, 1882. Had you believed in
he old adage, 'Believe nothing
you hear and only balf you see,"
you would have hit it precisely,
n the uordq and 6o,,rao found 80,